DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	b=Bz1pofntDxcxl7b4QnE6ATl+uAFc65R26cWuLao8MQvmxEHb7hi3U+41Cbwn7oWlfe
	tbqwI8648XEcx2UcZ5kKpB+aZvh6dTQV9cZohJZC++ajEwqyy13UmPoU+EtyCbKsxMG6
	kRLBh8oWIMwjk2LqTGihGGas/PYK9KLDzdrOY=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <87pqvgr1u5.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
References: <AANLkTimes1ndLhOxJupDh72h1MRR0q28wu7mjAeCOzVu@mail.gmail.com>
	<87pqvgr1u5.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 00:17:56 +0300
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=ey88aH2NQEwHDKZsLO31Xz-4Kg0mDHO3kmKkh@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: notmuch-next branch
From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
To: Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Precedence: list

On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Jameson Rollins
<jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 21:45:47 +0300, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gm=
ail.com> wrote:
>> I think many people agree notmuch mainline has been rather slow. So
>> I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
>> gitorious (please vote).
>>
>> More than one person should have write access to this repo, but some
>> guidelines should be in place. I propose that patches should be
>> signed-off-by at least another person in the mailing list before
>> pushing. It would be nice if this is how the mainline branch works,
>> but we don't need to wait for that to happen. We need to vote on who
>> are the people to have write access.
>
> I think this generally sounds like a fine idea, but I don't see why we
> need a single central repo that multiple people need access to. =C2=A0The
> whole point of git is to allow for distributed development without need
> for a central repo.

And yet, git is hosted in a central repo. Different projects have
different needs, and this one seems to need a place to cook up
patches, having multiple committers there seems like it would work.
Note that this wouldn't be the main repo, it would be preparing stage.

> In this case, folks can just merge the patches they're interested in
> into a "next" branch in their own personal repos, publish them where
> ever they want, and then every body can just keep their "next" branches
> synced with each other. =C2=A0As consensus is reached, the next release w=
ill
> emerge.

That might also work, it would be the first project I see doing that
though. But what I worry is the ordering of the patches; we might have
applied the same patches, but they would appear as totally different
branches to a 3rd party, and of course merging other people's 'next'
branches would create a total mess. There should be one repo that has
the latest and greatest 'next' branch that everybody can rebase into,
like the current 'master'.

--=20
Felipe Contreras